←back to thread

The web does not need gatekeepers: Cloudflare’s new “signed agents” pitch

(positiveblue.substack.com)
454 points positiveblue | 3 comments | 29 Aug 25 16:35 UTC | HN request time: 0.228s | source
Show context
TIPSIO ◴[29 Aug 25 16:57 UTC] No.45066555[source]▶
Everyone loves the dream of a free for all and open web.

But the reality is how can someone small protect their blog or content from AI training bots? E.g.: They just blindly trust someone is sending Agent vs Training bots and super duper respecting robots.txt? Get real...

Or, fine what if they do respect robots.txt, but they buy the data that may or may not have been shielded through liability layers via "licensed data"?

Unless you're reddit, X, Google, or Meta with scary unlimited budget legal teams, you have no power.

Great video: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M0QyOp7zqcY

replies(37): >>45066600 #>>45066626 #>>45066827 #>>45066906 #>>45066945 #>>45066976 #>>45066979 #>>45067024 #>>45067058 #>>45067180 #>>45067399 #>>45067434 #>>45067570 #>>45067621 #>>45067750 #>>45067890 #>>45067955 #>>45068022 #>>45068044 #>>45068075 #>>45068077 #>>45068166 #>>45068329 #>>45068436 #>>45068551 #>>45068588 #>>45069623 #>>45070279 #>>45070690 #>>45071600 #>>45071816 #>>45075075 #>>45075398 #>>45077464 #>>45077583 #>>45080415 #>>45101938 #
1. ctoth ◴[29 Aug 25 19:26 UTC] No.45068329[source]▶
"I want an open web!"

"Okay, that means AI companies can train on your content."

"Well, actually, we need some protections..."

"So you want a closed web with access controls?"

"No no no, I support openness! Can't we just have, like, ethical openness? Where everyone respects boundaries but there's no enforcement mechanism? Why are you making this so black and white?"

replies(2): >>45072479 #>>45091510 #
2. 1gn15 ◴[30 Aug 25 06:55 UTC] No.45072479[source]▶
> “When we started the “free speech movement,” we had a bold new vision. No longer would dissenters’ views be silenced. With the government out of the business of policing the content of speech, robust debate and the marketplace of ideas would lead us toward truth and enlightenment. But it turned out that freedom of the press meant freedom for those who owned one. The wealthy and powerful dominated the channels of speech. The privileged had a megaphone and used free speech protections to immunize their own complacent or even hateful speech. Clearly, the time has come to denounce the naïve idealism of the past and offer a new movement, Speech 2.0, which will pay more attention to the political economy of media and aim at “free-ish” speech — the good stuff without the bad.”

https://openfuture.eu/paradox-of-open-responses/misunderesti...

3. account42 ◴[01 Sep 25 10:42 UTC] No.45091510[source]▶
"I want a free an open society!"

"But criminals are people too."

See how stupid that sounds?